hi John,
I forgot about the Policy Product Matrix element in the TGF, the
intent for me to bring up those items were indeed not to add
additional standards to the TGF primer itself but to provide
tools to help realize the vision. i.e. Transformation is going
to be a long running process with many stakeholders involved, the
more tools to help produce standardized artifacts along the way
the better it is to repeat the processes and to retain/share
knowledge as we progress.
A quick click thru at the policy product wiki, it appears the
primary focus is to inventory what policies are used today. It
is a necessary step but not sure how exactly the analysis tools
will fit in there, thou.
re you other question about whether there is any similar work
exist, I suspect there is none. The work is done in the OMG
Business Model Integration task force, so the nature of the group
is to harmonize of what exist in the industry and fill n the gaps
of what needs to be developed. The BMI folks are more looking for
TGF as a use case to support broader adoption of OMG standards, I
think it is an opportunity to consider additional resources that
can help the realization of TGF, especially OMG has strong US gov.
presence.
perhaps we can help to focus the discussion of this thread by
figuring out how do we populate this use case page https://wiki.oasis-open.org/tgf/Use%20Cases
i.e. how one would use the current TGF artifacts and how one would
go about the analysis process to develop the business case for
transformation and to develop the roadmap for transformation with
multi-stakeholders involvement etc.
Jenny
On 10/1/2012 6:18 AM, John Borras wrote:
Jenny
I must confess
I haven’t done a deep dive into each of these standards yet
but at first glance they seem more like a set of tools and
techniques that can assist in the deployment of a TGF
programme. To that end it would seem more of a case of
referencing them in the Policy Product Matrix and maybe the
TGF Primer rather than adding to or creating new TGF
Patterns. But before we go down that route we should be
certain that there are no similar or competing standards
that we should give due consideration to. Do you have any
knowledge or views on that please?
Views on this
from other TC colleagues would be appreciated please.
John
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Jenny
Huang
Sent: 28 September 2012 22:55
To: 'TGF TC List'
Subject: [tgf] Complementary standards for
multi-stakeholders service delivery and citizen
engagement
Dear
all,
On
the last TC call, I mentioned that there are a few standards
from the Object Management Group might be useful to facilitate
the analysis and simulation of the complex problem space that
the TGF is addressing.
I’m
providing a short intro of those items here, will be happy to
arrange a few conference calls/webinars with domain experts
from the OMG to explore the topics further with the TC.
SBVR:
Semantic of Business Vocabularies and Business Rules
It is intended
to capture the semantics of business concepts and
relationships with support for natural-language-like
declarative _expression_ of
business rules of a complex entity, such as a business.
It includes the ability to express the concepts and rules
in multiple vocabularies (i.e., multiple languages).
This is an existing spec. a high level descriptions can be
found at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics_of_Business_Vocabulary_and_Business_Rules
Relevance to TGF: We need to examine
whether the current TGF Pattern Language spec. can be
enhanced with SBVR. This will allow instance of
requirements/concepts to be translated and managed at
regional level at the same time keeping the coherence at the
state/government level using modeling and relationship
techniques.
The specification is available here: http://www.omg.org/spec/SBVR/1.0/index.htm
VDML: Value Delivery Modeling Language
This is a work in progress in the OMG
(potential adoption in early 2013). The heart of this work
is to support Business Design and Innovation Management
driven by the creation and exchange of value. It fills the
gap between business models (e.g., Osterwalder) and business
process management.
Relevance to TGF: This systematic
modeling approach is essential for virtualized service
delivery and franchising business model with citizen
engagement as envisioned by the TGF
This blog post on “Outside-in Business
Architecture” provides some insights to the work http://fredacummins.blogspot.com/2012/01/outside-in-business-architecture-with.html
CMMN: Case Management Model and Notation
This is a work in progress in the OMG
(potential adoption in early 2013). The specification
defines a language for modeling of elements of a type of
case (e.g., tasks, stages, events, constraints,…) to support
adaptive planning, decision-making, collaboration and
coordination on individual cases.
Relevance to TGF: From a whole
government perspective, services to citizens and other
stakeholders often require ad-hoc coordination and
collaboration that crosses organizational boundaries and
engages shared services. For every transformational
project that is going to carry out in a “virtual
organization” fashion, similar governance and organization
process/structures are required as one would expect from a
single enterprise environment.
This type of work environment is already seen
for projects like “Healthy cities” yet lack of a structure
for effective community engagement. Here is another blog
post that provides a high level view: http://fredacummins.blogspot.com/2011/07/knowledge-worker-cockpit.html
Please note all of the above specifications are geared for
business/strategy thinkers to clearly model the desired
business/benefits first so that appropriate technology and who
they should be sourced from can be assessed in a much more
holistic manner in order to meet the business/citizen benefits
that are envisioned.
I’m
interested to get your feedback on my assessment of their
relevance to the TGF effort.
Regards,
Jenny
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:
